A SKETCH 

OF THE 

LIFE AND CHARACTER 

OF, 

CONSTANTINE 

THE 

Great 

BY 

GEO. W. WARVELLE, LL. D. 

Knight Grand Cross, Past Grand Sovereign, Etc. 



SECOND EDITION 



CHICAGO 

1915 



A SKETCH 

OF THE 

LIFE AND CHARACTER 

OF 

CONSTANTINE 

THE 

Great 

BY 

GEO. AV. y/ARVELLE, LL. D. 

Knight Grand Cross, Past Grand Sovereign, Etc. 



SECOND EDITION 



CHICAGO 

1915 



HGc 



3\S 

,\Ai3 



To Most Illustrious 

SAMUEL H. SMITH 

Grand Sovereign of the Order 
of the 

RED CROSS OF CONSTANTINE 

for the United States of America, 
this volume is fraternally inscribed by the 

AUTHOR 

Author 



A SKETCH 

CONSTANTINE THE GREAT 



As the reputed founder of the Imperial, Ecclesiastical and Mili- 
tary Order of the Red Cross, the name and memory of Constantine 
must ever command a certain degree of veneration from every true 
and loyal Knight Companion, and every incident connected with his 
life will always possess for them a peculiar interest. In this brochure 
the writer has endeavored to bring- together a few of the salient 
features of the career of this remarkable and highly gifted man, be- 
lieving that anything which tends to shed light upon the real or 
traditionary history of the Order will be an acceptable addition to 
the meager literature now accessible to the average Knight. In its 
compilation free use has been made of such material as the subject 
affords and to the works of Eusebius, Gibbon, Milman and others, 
as well as to the writings of Wright and Little of our own Order, 
the writer is largely indebted for the recitals which follow. It has 
been the custom of most writers to present only the pleasing side 
of Constantine's character, to extol his virtues, condone his faults 
and suppress or gloss over the crimes he committed to encompass 
his ambitious and not always praiseworthy ends. Without excep- 
tion, so far as the writer's observation has gone, this is true of all 
biographies written in the interest of the Red Cross Order and gener- 
ally so of those which treat of the subject in connection with the 
Christian church. In this sketch the sober facts of history are given 
as they appear ; the only province of the historian is to present the 
past as it was. 

Caius Flavius Valerius Aurelius Claudius Constantinus,^ sur- 
named Magnus (the great), was born at Naissus (now Nissa) in 
Upper Moesia,- February, A. D. 272. His father, commonly called 
Constantius Chlorus,^ came from a noble Dalmatian family, but his 

^Thirteen emperors have borne the name of Constantine. Two of these 
ruled the entire Roman empire, the others only that of the empire of the 
east. 

-It has often been asserted that Constantine was a native of England, 
but there is no proof to sustain the assertion. 

^His proper name was Flavius Valerius Constantius, but the Byzantine 
historians, with doubtful accuracy, applied to him the epithet Chlorus, or 
the Pale, and by this name he now generally figures in the history of his 
times. 



mother, Helena, seems to have been a woman of humble extraction 
and unknown antecedents.* When Constantine was ten years of 
age Diocletian, by the suffrage of the army, became emperor of 
the Roman dominions and thereupon associated with him Maximian, 
each assuming the title of Augustus. Six years later Galerius and 
Constantius were added to the government with the lesser title of 
Caesar, and upon attaining this dignity Constantius was compelled 
to repudiate his marriage with Helena and espouse the daughter of 
Maximian. 

The portion of the empire assigned to Constantius was the ex- 
treme west, including Spain, Gaul and Britain, but Constantine was 
detained at Rome as a hostage for his father's loyalty. Here he was 
carefully educated, although always an object of aversion to Maxi- 
mian, and in due time entered the army, serving with such distinc- 
tion under Diocletian that he was appointed a tribune of the first 
rank. His martial bearing and personal courage soon made him 
a favorite with the army, which excited the jealousy of the naturally 
suspicious Galerius, who, it is said, repeatedly exposed him to un- 
usual hazards in the hope of having him killed, but the only efifect 
was to strengthen in Contantine a natural wariness and discretion 
which often operated to his advantage later in life. 

In 305 Diocletian abdicated the throne, compelling the unwilling 
Maximian to follow his example, and thereby Constantius and 
Galerius succeeded to supreme rank and became the emperors or 
Augusti. Constantine, by birth and training, was entitled to be 
advanced to the dignity of Csesar, but Galerius refused to nominate 
him and his father did not dare to bestow the office upon him 
while he remained at what was virtually a hostile court. Hence, 
Severus and Maximin were chosen. Apprehensive for his own 
safety, Constantine now endeavored to join his father in the west, but 
it was only after repeated requests from his colleague that Galerius 
gave a reluctant consent to such a course. Indeed, there is ground 
for supposing that the consent was given only to be recalled, but 
Constantine, acting with the utmost promptitude, at once set out 
upon his journey and reached his father just as he was embarking 
at Boulogne to suppress a revolt in Britain. In this he was success- 
ful, but died, immediately after achieving victory, at York (Ebori- 
cum), England, in the year 306. This event marked the turning 

^Tradition says that Helena was the daughter of Caylus, a British king, 
but this is now regarded as a pure invention. The fiction is preserved in 
the "Historical Oration" of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre. 



point in Constantine's career. By the enthusiastic acclamations of 
the anny he was immediately proclaimed Augustus, a dignity he 
accepted with feigned reluctance that he might not incur the active 
enmity of Galerius, to whom he at once directed a letter expressing 
his regret in being compelled by circumstances to assume the purple 
before receiving the imperial sanction. Galerius, however, refused 
to recognize his succession and c-onferred the office on Severus, al- 
lowing Constantine only the title of Caesar. To this arrangement he 
apparently consented, but continued to govern the provinces which 
had been assigned to his father, pursuing the same vigorous policy 
which his father had inaugurated and demonstrating by repeated 
victories over the barbarians beyond the frontier his prowess and 
ability as a military leader. He promoted the internal prosperity of 
the country by a confirmation of his father's tolerant policy toward 
religious sects and won the esteem of his subjects by a mild yet 
wise government. 

The events of the next ensuing few years demonstrated the utter 
instability of the plan devised by Diocletian for the partition of power 
among Augusti and C?esars. While nominally colleagues in a com- 
mon enterprise, they were, in reality, rival princes plotting and 
counterplotting for sole supremacy, and this condition of affairs 
continued until the final concentration of all authority in Con- 
stantine. 

About 307 Maxentius, son of Maximian, induced his father to 
emerge from his retirement and again assume the purple, he tak- 
ing for himself the title of Caesar, while Maximian, to secure the 
friendship of Constantine, gave to him in marriage his daughter 
Fausta and caused him to be proclaimed Augustus. In the mean- 
time, Severus having been murdered, Galerius made his friend 
Licinus emperor, and thus six rulers struggled for supremacy in 
the Roman empire.^ 

While prudence, no less than family ties, should have dictated 
to Maxentius the policy of preserving friendly relations with Con- 
stantine, yet his ambition mastered his judgment and intoxicated 
with power he proclaimed himself emperor of all the west. Being 
supported by the praetorian guards he forced his father to leave 
Rome and ultimately to seek refuge at the court of his son-in-law, 
where for the second time he resigned the purple and affected to 
have no further desire for power. But during the absence of his 

^Galerius, Licinus and Maximin in the east and Maximian, Maxentius 
and Constantine in the west. 



protector he again attempted to resume imperial dignity and to 
incite a mutiny in his own favor. Upon learning of this, Constantine, 
with his usual promptitude and decision, assembled his army and 
pursuing Maximian overtook him at Marseilles, where he was per- 
mitted to avoid the humiliation of a public execution by taking 
his own life.^ 

The death of Maximian was used by Maxentius as a pretext 
for hostile measures which Constantine, unwilling to engage in war, 
ignored as long as safety would permit, but when Maxentius pre- 
pared to invade Gaul he anticipated him by rapidly crossing the 
Alps and entering Italy at the head of a well disciplined army. 
Defeating the forces of Maxentius at Susa, Turin and Verona he 
hastened toward Rome and in fifty-eight days after the capture 
of Verona found himself at Saxa Rubra, on the Cremera, a small 
stream about nine miles from Rome, where Maxentius lay en- 
trenched in great force. It is said that Maxentius had with dif- 
ficulty been roused to a sense of his danger and would not have 
taken the field in person had it not been for the clamor of the 
populace, and that, superstitious as he was cowardly, before he 
would attempt the fortunes of war he first consulted the Sibylline 
books, receiving, however, from their custodians a vague reply 
which, like the utterances of the oracle, could be interpreted to 
suit the event, whatever it might be.'^ On October 28, A. D. 312, 
he met the forces of Constantine in a decisive engagement; his 
army, though superior in numbers, was utterly routed with great 
carnage, while Maxentius himself, in attempting to make his escape 
over the Milvian bridge, was pressed by the throng into the river 
and drowned. 

It was just prior to this victory that the clebrated incident 
is said to have occurred which resulted in the conversion of Con- 
stantine to the Christian faith and the establishment of the Imperial 
Order of the Red Cross. The story is told with many variations 
in detail by a number of writers, but in substance it is that on the 
afternoon before the battle Constantine saw in the sky, just be- 
neath the sun, a pillar of light in the form of a cross, or, as 

*'Some of the Roman writers assert that Maximian was pardoned for 
this offence, but afterward entered into a plot to assassinate Constantine 
while he slept. Gibbon and other modern historians discredit the story, 
however. 

^The answer was, "Illo die hostem Romanorum esse periturum," or, "In 
that day the enemy of the Romans shall perish" ; the defeated party would, of 
course, be declared the enemy of Rome. 



related by some, the combined Chi and Rho forming the sacred 
monogram, and that in the night a heavenly messenger appeared 
to him in a vision commanding him to take that sign for his 
standard and promising him that hy that sign he should conquer.^ 
The story has been accepted with implicit faith by many as it has 
also been doubted and denied by others, and will ever remain the 
most interesting as well as the most disputed incident in the life of 
this illustrious man.^ 

By the victory of the Milvian bridge Constantine became the 
sole emperor of the west. He entered Rome a conqueror ; a pliant 
senate rendered him homage and assigned him the first rank among 
the three remaining Augusti, while to complete his imperial dig- 
nity he assumed the ancient title of Pontifex Maximus. Although 
he remained at Rome but a few weeks, he seems to have introduced 
a number of needed reforms, and among other things disbanded 
the prjetorian guards and destro3fed their camp. To secure the 
fruits of victory and effectually discourage insurrection, he slew 
the two sons and more intimate favorites of his fallen rival 
Maxentius, but this, we are told, was but in keeping with the 
rude spirit of the times, while his conduct, as described by one of 
his biographers, was "marked on the whole by wisdom and modera- 
tion." 

As the empire of the west was now in the dominion of one 
monarch, so a like condition came to prevail in the east. Galerius 
had died in 311 and a war ensued between his survivors, Maximin 
and Licinius, which finally resulted in the death of the former. 
Licinius then ruled in the east as Constantine did in the west and 
in order to cement the friendship of the two monarchs Licinius 
espoused Constantine's sister, Constantia, the marriage being cele- 
brated with great pomp at Milan in March, 313. But even this 
was not sufficiently potent to preserve peace, for in a little more 
than a year thereafter, for some cause not now known, or possibly 
for no cause, the two emperors were engaged in a war which was 

^Or, as the Latin version reads, "In hoc signo vinces." Some accounts 
state that Constantine saw the words as well as the cross in the sky, and 
in some instances the words are rendered in Greek. The accounts of the 
vision vary in many particulars according as the different historians seem 
to have been swayed by their prejudices in favor of the eastern or western 
church. 

^Modern scholars are of the opinion that the vision and dream are 
inventions of a later time, but are agreed that the sacred monogram was 
in fact employed by Constantine on the shields of his soldiers as a sort of 
magic to secure the help of the mighty God of the Christians. 



concluded only by the dismemberment of part of Licinius' territory. 
For nine years succeeding there was a truce, during which the 
power of Constantine augmented in the same ratio as that of his 
rival declined, and then came the inevitable struggle for supremacy. 
In 323 the emperors were again engaged in conflict, but the origin 
of the war, like that of the previous one in 314, is obscure or 
unknown. Indeed, it is thought probable that Constantine, having 
determined to make himself master of the world, did not wait 
for provocation but made a casus belli for himself. At all events, 
the war was conducted with all of Constantine's old time vigor 
and promptitude and in a series of brilliant engagements Licinius 
was totally defeated. His wife, sister of Constantine, now inter- 
ceded with the latter for her husband's life, which the conqueror 
promised to spare ; but the promise was not kept, for the year 
following Licinius was put to death by the orders of Constantine 
at Thessalonica, the place to which he had been exiled. The 
panegyrists of Constantine have sought many excuses for this ap- 
parently cold blooded and deliberate murder, but the verdict of 
history seems to make it an ineffaceable blot upon his memory. 

And now the ambitious dreams of Constantine were fulfilled, for 
with the conquest of Licinius the whole imperial power of the 
Roman dominions devolved upon him and thenceforth he ruled 
both the east and the west. His wise statesmanship and keen in- 
sight enabled him to hold the possessions thus acquired in com- 
parative security and the remainder of his reign was free from 
internal commotion or external violence. 

The balance of his life was devoted to plans for the perpetua- 
tion of his empire as well as his own fame. He established Chris- 
tianity as the state religion ; called several church councils, includ- 
ing the celebrated convocation at Nicaea (A. D. 325) ; founded a 
new capital for the empire on the site of Byzantium (A. D. 328) 
to which he gave his own name, though it would seem that the 
intention of the founder was to designate it as "New Rome," and 
by this latter name it is still officially known in the orthodox 
eastern church. In the year 326 he visited Rome for the purpose 
of formally celebrating- the twentieth anniversary of his succession 
to the purple, and here again the historian discovers a foul stain 
upon his character. It seems that during the festivities his eldest 
son, Crispus, was accused of some offence, the precise character 
of which is not fully apparent from the confused and contradictory 



accounts which have been transmitted to us.^° The accusation was 
made by Fausta, the second wife of Constantine, and resuhed in 
the banishment of Crispus to Pola, where he was put to death. 
Inckided in the charge were Licinius, the emperor's nephew, and a 
number of courtiers, ah of whom suffered the same fate. It is 
further related that Constantine, discovering- too late that the charge 
was false, then wreaked his vengeance on the unfortunate Fausta 
by causing her to be suffocated in her bath." These multiple trag- 
edies filled the minds of the people with consternation and fore- 
bodings. The emperor became very unpopular and soon after left 
Rome, never to return. 

His closing years were passed at the new Rome which he had 
erected on the Bosphorus, and on May 22, A. D. 337, being then 
about sixty-four years of age, after a brief illness, he expired at 
Nicomedia, receiving on his death bed a christian baptism at the 
hands of the Arian bishop, Eusebius. 

* * * 

It is difficult to arrive at a just estimate of the character of 
this celebrated man. Fancy and fable have been freely employed 
by many of his biographers and he has been extolled as the devout 
and pious protector of the infant church. That he did protect 
the church is an historical fact ; that he was either devout or pious 
is greatly to be doubted. Aside from the fact that on his conquest of 
Maxentius he permitted freedom of religion,'- and at a later period 
virtually recognized Christianity as the state religion, there is no 
evidence that he was a convert himself, and the circumstance that he 
received baptism only when on his death bed indicates that he had 
made no prior avowal of faith. It is true that a number of Roman 
Catholic writers assert that he received baptism at Rome in the 
year 326 from Pope Sylvester, and at the same time endowed that 
pontiff with temporal dominion, but the assertions are wholly with- 
out historical foundation. Indeed, it would seem that Constantine 
remained during the greater portion of his life strongly tinctured 
with the old heathen faiths and superstitions and that his recogni- 
tion of Christianity was induced by political rather than personal 
motives. 

loprom the best accounts the charge would seem to have been treason. 

i^Gibbon is of opinion, which he sustains by well-authenticated facts, 
that this additional crime is highly improbable. 

i^The celebrated "Edict of Milan," granting toleration to the Christians, 
is now regarded by many of the scholars as a myth. The Emperor Galerius 
in the year 311 issued an edict of complete toleration, and so, they say, no 
new edict was necessar}'. 

9 



It is contended, however, that the fact of deferring baptism 
until the approach of death was due not to a disbehef of Christian- 
ity but, in view of the then prevalent doctrine that baptism washed 
away all prior sins, was simply postponed until the last hour in 
order that the purifying" act might wipe out all the sins of a life- 
time. It is certain, however, that his coins, in many instances, 
bore the name of Apollo as well as the emblem of Christ, and that 
on important occasions he would order the soothsayers (haruspices) 
to be consulted with respect to the omens. From the time of the 
council of Nicsea (A. D. 325) his interest in Christianity becomes 
more marked, but it is thought that he was at best only half 
christian, half heathen, and combined the worship of Christ with 
that of Apollo. 

It has been said, that Constantine stands, as it were, on the 
dividing line of two worlds, the ancient and the modern — the pagan 
and the christian ; that he was born and educated within the former ; 
that he acted and died within the latter. Hence, it is contended, 
it is not possible to judge him wholly from the standpoint of either. 
While his mind may have understood the exalted truths of 
Christianity, and while he may have accurately measured the bene- 
fits which they promised to humanity, his heart remained pagan 
and never cast ofif the impressions, traditions and customs of the 

old religion. 

* * * 

It has been further said, that Constantine was entitled to be 
called "great" in virtue rather of what he did than of what he 
was, and that, tested by character, he stands among the lowest 
of all those to whom the epithet has been applied, either in ancient 
or modern times. His biographers all unite in ascribing to him 
personal courage of a high order, promptitude and decision in the 
execution of his plans, and a political sagacity that has seldom 
been excelled. His religious tolerance, which he exhibited through- 
out his life, was certainly a praiseworthy trait of character, par- 
ticularly in view of the times, but we look in vain for those 
generous sentiments which distinguish the truly great. There are, 
indeed, some traces of this during early life, but as he advanced 
in power these disappear, and while we might have pardoned the 
execution of the aged Alaximian as a military measure, we turn 
with loathing from the murders of the son and intimates of the 
fallen Maxentius, the treacherous treatment of the captive Lici- 
nius, the atrocities attending the execution of his son, Crispus, and 

10 



Itis nephew, Licinius, and the other bloody tragedies which stain the 
record of his later years. 

But if we regard only his achievements ; his campaigns and con- 
quests as a military leader, his administration as a statesman, and 
the results which have flowed from them, then we may truly say 
that he stands among the first of those who have ever won or 
worn the title of "great."' The political system which he inaugurated 
preserved the eastern empire for a thousand years after his death, 
and has left its impress upon all civilized nations even to the present 
dav, wdiile the system of religion which he rescued from the condi- 
tion of a proscribed heresy, by the impulse which he imparted, became 
the dominating thought of the world. 

* * * 

Among the traditions which attend the memory and cluster 
around the name of Constantine, is that which ascribes to him the 
institution of the Order of the Red Cross. The accepted legend is 
that immediately after his vision he caused to be constructed a stand- 
ard resembling the ''sign" which he had seen upon the sky and 
to which was given the name "Labarum." This standard, it is 
said, was entrusted to the care of fifty picked men of known valor 
and fidelity, whose station was marked with honors and emoluments. 
This detail of guards was then permanently established as an 
order and from this circumstance is traced our present organiza- 
tion. The fact of Constantine's assumption of the cross as an 
heraldic ensign is further cited as a striking illustration of the 
reality of his conversion to the Christian faith. 

Unfortunately, however, there is no evidence to support the 
statement that Constantine, either at or immediately after the time 
of his engagement with Maxentius, adopted the cross as his dis- 
tinguishing symbol, while such historical data as we have quite 
conclusively indicates that the Labarum did not come into use as 
a standard until about twenty years later. ^^ It is by no means 
improbable that a special guard was detailed to carry and protect 
the standard when it finally became an ensign to be borne at the 
head of the legions, and that it possessed a religious significance 
would be an additional reason for some sort of organization of 
this guard. But this is as far as legitimate conjecture may go. 
It is certain that the guard was not an order, in the sense in 
which that term is now understood, and it is idle to look for any 

^^Gibbon says it was first employed about the year 323. 

11 



of the special features of chivalric orders prior to the twelfth 
centiir}^ 

The Constantinian legend bears about the same relation to the 
Order of the Red Cross that the Arthurian legends do to the Order 
of the Garter. Neither is susceptible of demonstration and they are 
now regarded by scholars and critics simply as pleasing myths. Nor 
is it at all essential to the value or effectiveness of the Order as a 
social, moral and intellectual force, that it should, in fact, have a 
direct connection either with Constantine or his time. There is but 
little that is edifying to be gathered from that age of turbulence, 
violence and oppression, and if we regard the Constantinian legend 
not as an historical fact, but simply as a symbol, we shall relieve 
the subject from whatever difficulty or embarrassment may now 
seem to attend it. 

Geo. W. WAR^^ELLE. 

Chicago, Jan. 23, 1915. 



12 



r 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



020 115 130 2 



